FREE FALLING FALLBOARD

[Ron Torrella]

On Tue, 11 Feb 1997, james allen bickerton wrote:

> tuned within the last 12 months.  The owner also expressed
> dissatisfaction with her previous technician, claiming that the tech,
> while tuning her piano, had removed the fallboard, and while in the
> process, had broken the slow-fall mechanism on the fallboard.  I have
> several questions:
[snipped question #1]
>   2.  When confronted with a piano requiring a pitch raise, and the
> owner refuses to pay charges beyond a standard tuning fee, do you (a)
> refuse to do the work, (b) tune the piano at current pitch  (c) spend
> the extra time and do the job right for the standard fee?

It's not a question of *refusing* to do the work -- you weren't *ordered*
to do it, you were [perhaps] *asked*.  A huge difference.  One who is
asked to perform a task for a customer (*by* the customer) may, in certain
situations, decline to do so if the customer is unwilling to pay the
required fee(s).  In this case, if this is a new customer to whom you are
not otherwise obligated (ie. you're under contract to perform), I would
suggest explaining what your fees are and why you charge them.  The
customer is welcome to engage you for the job on your terms.  If the terms
aren't acceptable, then move on.  Plenty of fish to fry out there!

>   3.  How does one handle customers when they speak ill of other piano
> techs, especially when it is obvious that the previous work was
> performed poorly?

Make no comment.  Change the subject, gracefully, if you can.  It's best
to keep out of the sticky stuff if you can help it.

Good luck!

			     Ron Torrella, RPT
			Assistant Piano Technician
			  University of Michigan
			      School of Music